Citrus vs Sharky: Solana NFT lending differences (2026)

Both platforms connect NFT borrowers and lenders on Solana, but their main difference is how they handle collateral. Citrus uses peer-to-peer loans with terms set for each NFT, and the NFT is held by the protocol while the loan is open. It also offers NFT mortgages, lender yield and Juice reward points that can be redeemed for bonus NFTs and Solana rewards.

Sharky focuses on SOL loans against NFTs and describes its setup as escrowless: borrowers keep the NFT in their wallet during the loan. Its lending side offers SOL for interest, and a lender receives the NFT if the borrower defaults. Sharky also separates its interface into Lend Offers and Borrow Loans. Choose based on whether direct loan negotiation and Citrus’s extras matter more to you, or whether keeping the NFT in your wallet during the loan is the priority.

Neither platform publishes specific fees, interest rates or loan durations. Citrus describes its fees as low and says lenders can earn APY, but it does not give percentages. Sharky mentions lender APY without publishing a figure. In both cases, review the actual offer in the app before committing, including the interest rate, duration and any platform charges. Solana network fees also apply.

Liquidity is limited on both platforms. Citrus has about $62,182 in TVL, compared with about $88,784 for Sharky. Those figures do not guarantee that a suitable lender or loan offer will be available. Both TVL figures are also reported as having fallen over the previous seven days: 11.7% for Citrus and 14.9% for Sharky. If a loan’s terms are not acceptable, do not assume another offer will be available immediately.

Neither Citrus nor Sharky has listed audits, so users cannot rely on a published audit to assess contract security. Smart-contract risk remains uncertain on both platforms. Citrus holds collateral while a loan is open, which means a contract flaw could put the NFT at risk. Sharky’s escrowless approach keeps the NFT in the borrower’s wallet during the loan, but that does not remove the risks of using a lending protocol or the consequences of default.

NFT prices can fall sharply, and some NFTs may be difficult to sell. A borrower who cannot repay may lose the NFT under the loan terms; a lender may end up with collateral worth less than the amount lent. Review all terms before signing and consider the legal rules for NFT lending and DeFi where you live. Use only funds you can afford to lose.

Choose Citrus if you want a peer-to-peer marketplace where borrowers and lenders negotiate terms for individual Solana NFTs, or if its mortgage feature and Juice rewards are useful to you. Be prepared for the NFT to be held as collateral while the loan is open, and check whether a lender is available on acceptable terms. Its TVL is lower than Sharky’s, and both platforms have limited liquidity.

Choose Sharky if keeping the NFT in your wallet during the loan is your deciding factor, or if you want to lend SOL through separate Lend Offers. Its TVL is higher than Citrus’s, but it has also declined over the reported seven-day period; that does not guarantee depth for any particular NFT or offer. Both projects are Solana-only, have no listed audits and do not publish specific rates or fees. Neither is a clear choice for users who need published security reviews or predictable loan costs.